In his recent speech at the London Waterways Museum, CRT Trustee John Dodwell, among other things has acknowledged some things I and and others have been complaining about for some time. In the notes from his presentation John says:
"Just a word about overstayers. If you see a boat staying too long at a visitor mooring, don’t assume it is a continuous cruiser who’s not moved on. It could be someone with a home mooring who’s left it there for too long whilst the owner has gone home."
For me this suggests a move forward in CRT thinking and perhaps a move away from the old mantra that Continuous Cruisers are the root of all evil , a view falsely promulgated by the previous regime.
Does it mean that all is well yet - of course not.
Friday, 13 November 2015
Tuesday, 20 October 2015
An outbreak of common sense in CRT?
Saying something positive about CRT? Well yes. It seems that what many have said about the futility of tinkering with visitor mooring durations, so beloved of Sally Ash and some others, if not to stop, will at least now only be attempted on a rational basis. Last week CRT announced its Short Term Mooring Framework.
The policy sets out detailed rational criteria that must be considered before imposing changes on visitor mooring durations. It acknowledges a clear distinction between formal visitor moorings and casual mooring and sets some basic standards of maintenance for visitor moorings. The only notable absence is anything about dredging and depth of water. Most importantly it sets out a national framework. It seems that someone has realised the futility of different things going on in different regions, confusing boaters and frontline staff alike!
The policy also included what is supposed to be a comprehensive consultation framework and makes piloting future changes all but mandatory.
The policy sets out detailed rational criteria that must be considered before imposing changes on visitor mooring durations. It acknowledges a clear distinction between formal visitor moorings and casual mooring and sets some basic standards of maintenance for visitor moorings. The only notable absence is anything about dredging and depth of water. Most importantly it sets out a national framework. It seems that someone has realised the futility of different things going on in different regions, confusing boaters and frontline staff alike!
The policy also included what is supposed to be a comprehensive consultation framework and makes piloting future changes all but mandatory.
Saturday, 19 September 2015
The ghost of Sally Ash returns to haunt CRT
Following reports that CRT's General Towpath Mooring Permit may have been 'illegal', we are receiving reports that a number of PPI claims firms are looking at this new line of business. Consequently some boaters should expect to receive the following communication shortly:
"This is an important message. Have you been mis-sold a mooring permit? Your mooring authority has set aside thousands of pounds. We at Grasping and Shyster have many years experience helping consumers..."
These permits were of course promoted by Sally Ash and my old friend Dr Milkem Drie. The permits were of course thinly disguised and rebranded Roving Mooring Permits and as I said at the time, Buyer Beware! Reports that Dr Drie has an interest in Grasping and Shyster have been denied.
Sally Ash has of course since been awarded an MBE for her services to the waterways as part of a tradition that those familar with the banking sector will be aware of. Oops!
"This is an important message. Have you been mis-sold a mooring permit? Your mooring authority has set aside thousands of pounds. We at Grasping and Shyster have many years experience helping consumers..."
These permits were of course promoted by Sally Ash and my old friend Dr Milkem Drie. The permits were of course thinly disguised and rebranded Roving Mooring Permits and as I said at the time, Buyer Beware! Reports that Dr Drie has an interest in Grasping and Shyster have been denied.
Sally Ash has of course since been awarded an MBE for her services to the waterways as part of a tradition that those familar with the banking sector will be aware of. Oops!
Tuesday, 15 September 2015
NABO, BW/CRT and legal stuff - some personal retrospective!
I don't look at Canalworld Forum that much cos frankly I find that there is a lot of junk verging on personal abuse in there which is not constructive. However NBW's article highlighting that the CRT vs Wingfield transcript is now in wider hands prompted me to look.
Sterling work from my old mucker Nigel Moore and others here and I believe more valuable insights now (and to follow no doubt) into what I previously wrote about as the double edged sword.
Out of all that there were some comments about NABO and its 'legal activities'. I wrote about this a while back and it is notable to me that the 2013 post is one of the most read on ths blog. I have felt moved to write some more now, albeit largely about past matters, which is now up on CWF and which I reproduce here for your consideration.
Sterling work from my old mucker Nigel Moore and others here and I believe more valuable insights now (and to follow no doubt) into what I previously wrote about as the double edged sword.
Out of all that there were some comments about NABO and its 'legal activities'. I wrote about this a while back and it is notable to me that the 2013 post is one of the most read on ths blog. I have felt moved to write some more now, albeit largely about past matters, which is now up on CWF and which I reproduce here for your consideration.
Tuesday, 1 September 2015
Engineers Wharf.... again!
Yeah I am going to bang on about this again. As of today there are still six vacant berths up for auction, again at £4704 reserves. I've said the things about how CRT claiming to charge Market Rents is self evidently a farce, how CRT are more worried about losing face than the huge void losses they are incurring. I've said it again and again: so a couple of different thoughts today.
How about offering the vacant berths here as Winter moorings? Three or four months rent in a year has to be better than none?
How about keeping a pontoon clear as a service point for the wider community? The Better Relationships Group and boaters in general have been pressing CRT for more facilities for cruising boats for months and years. Here is a ready made opportunity to improve access to facilities in West London?
Come on CRT; dare you to think out of the box?
How about offering the vacant berths here as Winter moorings? Three or four months rent in a year has to be better than none?
How about keeping a pontoon clear as a service point for the wider community? The Better Relationships Group and boaters in general have been pressing CRT for more facilities for cruising boats for months and years. Here is a ready made opportunity to improve access to facilities in West London?
Come on CRT; dare you to think out of the box?
Wednesday, 19 August 2015
All quiet?
Mid August is usually a lull in the storm of CRT issues and one the whole much the same with me. If this year is true to form around about the beginning of September a load of things will kick off again.
Me; had a short dialogue with Richard Parry about the disappointing experience as a long term mooring customer. Ironically a few days after that conversation, CRT contractors turned up as planned to change our Service bollards over. A few hours in, one of my neighbours knocked on the boat to alert me to the fact that the new bollards did not have pairs of taps on them.
It seems CRT have unilaterally decided that having had a tap per berth for the last fifteen years or so we now have to go over to sharing. So much to being a valued customer!
Me; had a short dialogue with Richard Parry about the disappointing experience as a long term mooring customer. Ironically a few days after that conversation, CRT contractors turned up as planned to change our Service bollards over. A few hours in, one of my neighbours knocked on the boat to alert me to the fact that the new bollards did not have pairs of taps on them.
It seems CRT have unilaterally decided that having had a tap per berth for the last fifteen years or so we now have to go over to sharing. So much to being a valued customer!
Friday, 17 July 2015
Engineers Wharf conspiracy theory...
Maybe someone at CRT has taken my last post on this to heart? Vacancies at Engineers Wharf are advertised for auction today with a reserve down to £4704? Though not as low a £4324 reserve in 2012... Still taking the pixx in my view...
Sunday, 14 June 2015
Canal and River Trust's Double Edged Legal Sword
It is well known that going to Court can be a double edged sword. And it seems CRT is going to be put to the knife yet again?
We have recently seen an FoI request revealing how much CRT spent in three other prominent court cases. CRT subsequently say they are unable to provide their internal costs (staff time), so the figures are incomplete, but the cases concerned have on the partial figures cost in excess of £150 000. One case was successful from CRT's point of view (Mayers), but the other two (Wingfield and Dunkley) were settled without full trial.
Now two other boaters have made High Court applications about CRT's conduct. (Outlines of Leigh Ravenscroft's and Matthew Jones' claims can be viewed via these respective links.)
As ever some of the forum trolls have been having a go at the boaters concerned, about the money they are costing CRT, conveniently forgetting that these latest two actions are in response to CRT having previously initiated actions against the boaters. It should also be noted that the respective Courts due to hear both cases had to be satisfied there is some basic merit in the claims before these actions could go ahead.
As many have been asking over the last few weeks, are the levels of legal expenditure being incurred by CRT appropriate?
We have recently seen an FoI request revealing how much CRT spent in three other prominent court cases. CRT subsequently say they are unable to provide their internal costs (staff time), so the figures are incomplete, but the cases concerned have on the partial figures cost in excess of £150 000. One case was successful from CRT's point of view (Mayers), but the other two (Wingfield and Dunkley) were settled without full trial.
Now two other boaters have made High Court applications about CRT's conduct. (Outlines of Leigh Ravenscroft's and Matthew Jones' claims can be viewed via these respective links.)
As ever some of the forum trolls have been having a go at the boaters concerned, about the money they are costing CRT, conveniently forgetting that these latest two actions are in response to CRT having previously initiated actions against the boaters. It should also be noted that the respective Courts due to hear both cases had to be satisfied there is some basic merit in the claims before these actions could go ahead.
As many have been asking over the last few weeks, are the levels of legal expenditure being incurred by CRT appropriate?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
